A. Decisions on applications shall be classified as Type I, II, III, IV, or V, based on the amount of discretion exercised by the decision-maker, the level of impact associated with the decision, the amount and type of input sought, and the type of appeal opportunity available. The procedures for the five different permit review process types are distinguished according to who makes the decision, whether public notice is required, whether a public hearing is required before a decision is made, and whether an administrative appeal process is provided. The types of decisions are set forth in ECC 15.210.030 and the requirements for each type are set forth in ECC 15.210.040.

A. Determination by Director. The director shall determine the proper procedure for all permit applications. If there is a question as to the appropriate type of process, the director shall resolve it in favor of the higher type number.

B. Optional Consolidated Project Permit Application Processing. A Type V legislative nonproject action shall not be consolidated with a project permit application, but may be processed concurrently with the project permit application to the extent permitted by the processes and timelines established in the LDC for each action. Unless a different consolidation process is stated elsewhere in this title, all project approvals that involve two or more project permit application processes may, at the applicant’s written request, be processed collectively under the highest numbered type procedure required for any part of the application or may be processed individually under each of the procedures identified by the code. If the application is processed under the individual procedures option, the highest numbered type procedure must be processed prior to the subsequent lower numbered procedure.

C. SEPA Review. SEPA review is governed by Chapter 15.270 ECC and all applications shall be reviewed under SEPA, unless categorically exempt from such SEPA review. SEPA review shall be conducted concurrently with project permit review. The following actions are exempt from such concurrent review:

1. Projects categorically exempt from SEPA; and

2. Components of previously completed planned actions, to the extent permitted by law and consistent with the EIS for the planned action.

D. Decision-Maker(s). Applications processed in accordance with subsection (B) of this section which have the same highest numbered procedure but are assigned different hearing bodies shall be heard collectively by the highest decision-maker(s). The city council is the highest, followed by the hearing examiner, followed by the designated board or commission, and then the director.

E. Hearings. During the permit review process, permits are allowed only one open record hearing, which can be either an open record predecision public hearing or an open record appeal public hearing, and one closed record appeal hearing, except for the appeal of a determination of significance which must be appealed directly to city council in a closed record appeal hearing at the time it is issued and prior to any further review on the underlying permit. [Ord. 4769 § 7, 2017; Ord. 4656 § 1 (Exh. O2), 2013.]

A. Review Process Type I. These decisions are based on compliance with specific, nondiscretionary and/or technical standards that are clearly enumerated in the LDC or other adopted city development codes. Most of these decisions are made administratively through a Type I review process by the director or by the landmarks and design commission if the project involves properties listed on the landmarks register. There are generally no notice or hearing requirements and no appeal opportunity for Type I decisions except for judicial appeals. Type I decisions are not subject to environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), codified at Chapter 43.21C RCW (also see Chapter 15.270 ECC).

C. Review Process Type III. These are quasi-judicial decisions that are made by the designated decision-maker and involve the use of discretionary judgment in the review of each specific application. Type III decisions require findings, conclusions, an open record public hearing and recommendations prepared by the review authority for the final decision. Any administrative appeal of a SEPA threshold determination or critical area final determination shall be consolidated with the open record public hearing on the project permit, except a SEPA determination of significance, which must be appealed directly to city council at the time it is issued and prior to any further review on the underlying permit.

D. Review Process Type IV. These quasi-judicial decisions are made by the city council and the hearing examiner and involve the use of discretionary judgment in the review of each specific application. Type IV decisions may require a predecision open record public hearing by the designated body which will then provide recommendations to the decision-maker. The final decision must include findings and conclusions in support of the decision. Any administrative appeal of a SEPA threshold determination shall be consolidated with the open record public hearing on the project permit, except a SEPA determination of significance, which must be appealed directly to city council at the time it is issued and prior to any further review on the underlying permit.

E. Review Process Type V. These are legislative, nonproject decisions made by the city council under its authority to establish policies and regulations regarding future private and public developments, and management of public lands. Type V actions include comprehensive plan adoption or amendment, area-wide rezones, annexations, adoption or changes to development regulations, and the siting of essential public facilities. Because Type V actions are not project permit applications, they are not governed by the same procedural rules as project permits. Each Type V action is included separately in the LDC with its own established review and decision process. [Ord. 4807 § 15, 2018; Ord. 4656 § 1 (Exh. O2), 2013.]

A. Review Process Type I. Table 15.210.050(A) identifies the types of projects and permits that require a Type I review process. Any decision-making, procedural, or noticing variations from the Type I review process are described in the middle column. The right column identifies code sections applicable to the project/permit.

Table 15.210.050(A). Projects under Type I review process.

Where superscript numbers are included in a cell, please reference the applicable number under “Notes/conditions” below the table.

B. Review Process Type II. Table 15.210.050(B) identifies the types of projects and permits that require a Type II review process. Any decision-making, procedural, or noticing variations from the Type II review process are described in the middle column. The right column identifies code sections applicable to the project/permit.

Table 15.210.050(B). Projects under Type II review process.

Where superscript numbers are included in a cell, please reference the applicable number under “Notes/conditions” below the table.

C. Review Process Type III. Table 15.210.050(C) identifies the types of projects and permits that require a Type III review process. Any decision-making, procedural, or noticing variations from the Type III review process are described in the middle column. The right column identifies code sections applicable to the project/permit.

Table 15.210.050(C). Projects under Type III review process.

Where superscript numbers are included in a cell, please reference the applicable number under “Notes/conditions” below the table.

D. Review Process Type IV. Table 15.210.050(D) identifies the types of projects and permits that require a Type IV review process. Any decision-making, procedural, or noticing variations from the Type IV review process are described in the middle column. The right column identifies code sections applicable to the project/permit.

Table 15.210.050(D). Projects under Type IV review process.

Where superscript numbers are included in a cell, please reference the applicable number under “Notes/conditions” below the table.

E. Review Process Type V. Table 15.210.050(E) identifies the types of approvals and permits that require a Type V review process. Any decision-making, procedural, or noticing variations from the Type V review process are described in the middle column. The right column identifies code sections applicable to the permit.

Table 15.210.050(E). Approvals subject to Type V review process.

Where superscript numbers are included in a cell, please reference the applicable number under “Notes/conditions” below the table.

A. Overview and Purpose. The LDC provides for a number of specific departure opportunities to development standards. The purpose is to provide applicants with the option of proposing alternative design treatments provided such departures meet the “purpose” of the particular standard and any additional departure criteria set forth for the particular departure opportunity.

B. Departures Are Voluntary. This provision allows the flexibility for applicants to propose alternative designs on a voluntary basis, provided they meet the purpose of the standard and applicable departure criteria as noted above.

C. Applicability. Departure opportunities are available only to specific standards that allow for departures. Divisions IV and V include one or more standards that allow for departure opportunities.

D. Procedures. Permit applications that include departure requests go through the standard review procedures set forth in ECC 15.210.050 depending on the application type.

E. Approval Criteria. Project applicants must successfully demonstrate to the decision-maker how the proposed departure meets the purpose(s) of the standard and other applicable departure criteria that applies to the specific standard.

F. Documentation. The decision-maker shall document the reasons for approving all departures (to be maintained with project application records) for the purpose of providing consistency in decision-making by the city. [Ord. 4656 § 1 (Exh. O2), 2013.]